LEIGHTON, DANIELLE L., PEOPLE v

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 12, 2015
DocketKA 14-00568
StatusPublished

This text of LEIGHTON, DANIELLE L., PEOPLE v (LEIGHTON, DANIELLE L., PEOPLE v) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
LEIGHTON, DANIELLE L., PEOPLE v, (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

689 KA 14-00568 PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., CARNI, SCONIERS, VALENTINO, AND WHALEN, JJ.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

DANIELLE L. LEIGHTON, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

DAVID J. FARRUGIA, PUBLIC DEFENDER, LOCKPORT (JOSEPH G. FRAZIER OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

MICHAEL J. VIOLANTE, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, LOCKPORT (LAURA T. BITTNER OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Niagara County Court (Sara S. Farkas, J.), rendered May 9, 2013. The judgment convicted defendant, upon her plea of guilty, of failure to exercise due care, reckless driving, driving while ability impaired by drugs, driving while ability impaired by the combined influence of drugs or of alcohol and any drug or drugs, vehicular assault in the second degree and assault in the second degree.

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting her upon her plea of guilty of, inter alia, assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.05 [4]). We agree with defendant that the waiver of the right to appeal does not encompass her challenge to the severity of the sentence because “no mention was made on the record during the course of the allocution concerning the waiver of defendant’s right to appeal” with respect to her conviction that she was also waiving her right to appeal any issue concerning the severity of the sentence (People v Pimentel, 108 AD3d 861, 862, lv denied 21 NY3d 1076; see People v Maracle, 19 NY3d 925, 928). We nevertheless conclude that the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.

Entered: June 12, 2015 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

People v. Maracle
973 N.E.2d 1272 (New York Court of Appeals, 2012)
People v. Pimentel
108 A.D.3d 861 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
LEIGHTON, DANIELLE L., PEOPLE v, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/leighton-danielle-l-people-v-nyappdiv-2015.